I would agree with good ol Nicky but Alonso 's drives in Brazil , US and Korea left a bit too much to be desired for him to be considered automatic great !

Had he won - now that would have been a story and he would have shown that he transcended the car. As it happened he didnt when he had the ability and a chance to. No shame in being slower than the teammate in the last 3 crucial races for a normal driver but for an all time great driver , its a no no

Maybe Fry didn't miss the point that Vettel was slightly weaker during the first half of the '12 season than his team mate Webber.

Yup. Except he wasn't. Unless you translate 3 races to "the first half of the season".

He was. He was struggling against Webber and only during the 2nd half he left Webber into dust and made the points gap after Belgian GP.

_________________Champions are made from something they have deep inside of them - a desire, a dream, a vision. They have last-minute stamina, they have to be a little faster, they have the skill & the will but the will must be stronger than the skill. Muhammad Ali

What seperates Alonso, Hamilton and i would say Kimi is they can win when the car isn't the best. Vettel still has to prove that yet, Jenson 100% can't and also other drivers would struggle.

Again, Vettel has proven that. Sadly the fact that he ended up on a team who's lead engineer is unfairly given all the credit when the fact is Red bull wasn't fairy cakes until Vettel came on board. That's something that it seems Vettel will have to unfairly endure until he proves he's a winner post Newey. The fact is he has just as much to do with Red Bull's successes as does Newey.

To clarify on both Alonso, Raikkonen AND Hamilton, they both won their championships while driving a car that was among the best but the cars were not the very best. '05 & '06 Ferrari and Renault were closely matched and in 2007 & 2008 the McLaren and Ferrari were dead nuts to one another and the final standings show just how so which says in plain black and white the cars driven to the championship were indeed not the very best in the field. It came down to the drivers and in 2008 at least, I think Massa outperformed Hamilton by the slightest edge in securing the best possible position when it counted and Hamilton was lucky Toyota made such a huge mistake to gift him the position he otherwise would have struggled to take and snatch the championship from Massa's clutches… barely.

Still highly competitive and ultra close though which is the point of this post.

I'm just wondering how Toyota gifted Hamilton the WDC when it was their intial gamble to stay out on slicks that enabled Glock to get in front of Hamilton in the first place?

Fry reckons Hamilton is in the same category as Ferrari driver Fernando Alonso when it comes to winning with a car that is not the class of the field.

He believes world champion Sebastian Vettel is yet to prove that despite three titles in a row.

"Certainly in my view, Lewis and Fernando Alonso are the two best drivers," he added. "I'd caveat that by saying Sebastian Vettel may well be in that group, but he's always had the best car, and he's got to prove it, in my mind.

"Certainly Fernando this year, when the Ferrari has not been the best car by any stretch of the imagination, has still done an exceptional job.

"And I think Lewis is still in that category of being a driver you could give not quite the best car and he could still win races, whereas most of the other drivers in the Formula 1 field will probably win the race if you give them the best car."

Talk about contradicting himself in that article. Hamilton will be going to his 3rd team if his next step is Ferrari yet Vettel would be on his 4th as would Hulkenberg and Perez and Grosjean would also be headed for their 3rd team if their next stop is at Ferrari. What's different though is that Hamilton is a PROVEN race winner and a much better qualifier than all of the people mentioned in the article bar Vettel with whom I think is an equally sensational qualifier as well as race winner. THAT would be the greatest driver pairing, possibly of all time. Hamilton's style is a little bit Senna-esk and very Prost-like in his approach during races where as Vettel is a bit Senna-esk and comports himself similarly to Schumacher during races where he doesn't let up one bit regardless of how big a lead he's enjoying.

Either way, between Hamilton or Vettel you'd be hard pressed to pick a clear cut best driver though I suspect perhaps Lewis might edge Vettel in identical equipment because I feel he's a better passer, but to do so he would have to ensure to never allow Vettel to pull away from him.

This article just proves that di Montezemolo is just full of both himself and the brown stuff!

I would agree with good ol Nicky but Alonso 's drives in Brazil , US and Korea left a bit too much to be desired for him to be considered automatic great !

Had he won - now that would have been a story and he would have shown that he transcended the car. As it happened he didnt when he had the ability and a chance to. No shame in being slower than the teammate in the last 3 crucial races for a normal driver but for an all time great driver , its a no no

Maybe Fry didn't miss the point that Vettel was slightly weaker during the first half of the '12 season than his team mate Webber.

Yup. Except he wasn't. Unless you translate 3 races to "the first half of the season".

He was. He was struggling against Webber and only during the 2nd half he left Webber into dust and made the points gap after Belgian GP.

So then could you tell me where Webber was better than Vettel?

Silverstone, Monaco, China. That's 3.

Like I said, Seb made the points gap to Mark from Belgian GP to Brazilian GP and until then was struggling against his team mate. That half a season rough patch is a blemish on his otherwise great season and for me that, though he won the title, doesn't put him on the same level as Alonso's who had to operate with a worse car than Seb.

Erm no, see, discussions don't work this way. When you want to say Vettel was "weaker than Webber during the first half of the season", you have to be able to back that up. You can't just repeat vague statements when clear arguments are presented.

Erm no, see, discussions don't work this way. When you want to say Vettel was "weaker than Webber during the first half of the season", you have to be able to back that up. You can't just repeat vague statements when clear arguments are presented.

I've already said, the points tally. Compared to Webbo he made the points gap from Belgium. Seb was great in the 2nd half and cumulated the points to win the title but the first half wasn't that convincing from him.

Luca is losing his marbels. Alonso arrived it was his 4th team, Vettel is already at his 3rd etc.

Luca isn't "losing his marbles' - he's just trying to prove that he knows all about F1.... He lost his marbles when he determined to get rid of the winning Ferrari F1 combination - just to gain control.

Erm no, see, discussions don't work this way. When you want to say Vettel was "weaker than Webber during the first half of the season", you have to be able to back that up. You can't just repeat vague statements when clear arguments are presented.

I've already said, the points tally. Compared to Webbo he made the points gap from Belgium. Seb was great in the 2nd half and cumulated the points to win the title but the first half wasn't that convincing from him.

What a load of drivel. 9 races in Webber was 5-4 up. 9 races is most of the "first half of the season". Webber beat vettel in mal, china, monaco, europe and finally good old Great Britain.

Erm no, see, discussions don't work this way. When you want to say Vettel was "weaker than Webber during the first half of the season", you have to be able to back that up. You can't just repeat vague statements when clear arguments are presented.

I've already said, the points tally. Compared to Webbo he made the points gap from Belgium. Seb was great in the 2nd half and cumulated the points to win the title but the first half wasn't that convincing from him.

What a load of drivel. 9 races in Webber was 5-4 up. 9 races is most of the "first half of the season". Webber beat vettel in mal, china, monaco, europe and finally good old Great Britain.

Webber was not better than Vettel in Malaysia or Europe. And no, 9 races is not the first half, that would be 11 races.

Still. According to you, was Hamilton "weaker" than Button in, say, Abu Dhabi? Singapore? Looking forward to that answer.

Erm no, see, discussions don't work this way. When you want to say Vettel was "weaker than Webber during the first half of the season", you have to be able to back that up. You can't just repeat vague statements when clear arguments are presented.

I've already said, the points tally. Compared to Webbo he made the points gap from Belgium. Seb was great in the 2nd half and cumulated the points to win the title but the first half wasn't that convincing from him.

What a load of drivel. 9 races in Webber was 5-4 up. 9 races is most of the "first half of the season". Webber beat vettel in mal, china, monaco, europe and finally good old Great Britain.

Webber was not better than Vettel in Malaysia or Europe. And no, 9 races is not the first half, that would be 11 races.

Still. According to you, was Hamilton "weaker" than Button in, say, Abu Dhabi? Singapore? Looking forward to that answer.

10 races is first half of the season not 11. Also I did not say 9 races is the "first half of the season" see that part I put in bold it says 9 races "is most of the".

Seriously man. If you want to mix into the debate, please don't move it to suit your agenda.We weren't talking about "most of the". We were talking about the first half of the season. Which is (indeed) 10 races.

Out of the original post I reacted to:

Quote:

during the first half of the '12 season

Quite a shame though you only got to nitpicking instead of answering what is really at hand:

Quote:

Webber was not better than Vettel in Malaysia or Europe. And no, 9 races is not the first half, that would be 11 races.

Still. According to you, was Hamilton "weaker" than Button in, say, Abu Dhabi? Singapore? Looking forward to that answer.

You can add Europe to the question about Hamilton. And some others, but I took the more blatant ones.

Seriously man. If you want to mix into the debate, please don't move it to suit your agenda.We weren't talking about "most of the". We were talking about the first half of the season. Which is (indeed) 10 races.

Out of the original post I reacted to:

Quote:

during the first half of the '12 season

Quite a shame though you only got to nitpicking instead of answering what is really at hand:

Quote:

Webber was not better than Vettel in Malaysia or Europe. And no, 9 races is not the first half, that would be 11 races.

Still. According to you, was Hamilton "weaker" than Button in, say, Abu Dhabi? Singapore? Looking forward to that answer.

You can add Europe to the question about Hamilton. And some others, but I took the more blatant ones.

He was not weaker more unlucky yet button finished so the points go to him. Vettel was unlucky in valencia, but he made a mistake in malaysia his fault. 5-5 8-3?

Sure, as far as finished/results is concerned, VET-WEB was 5-5 in the first half.But when we're discussing about being "weaker", it goes further than to just look at the standings. So in that tally, Vettel would get Valencia as being better.

About Malaysia: I hold Karthikeyan responsible. Vettel left Karthikeyan enough space but Karthikeyan decided to steer right when he didn't have to. That punctured Vettels tyre. That's why Karthikeyan was punished - the marshalls obviously see it this way too. So, as far as performance is concerned, Vettel was better here too.

That's how I arrive at 7-3 in the 'being weaker' discussion. Even if you don't agree about Malaysia, it would be 6-4 and RaisinChips would still not be correct in saying Vettle was weaker than Webber in the first half.

And that's actually not too far from what happened in the second half of the season at Ferrari, with Massa being better in a few races (but having to take penalties and not being allowed to pass or stay ahead - understably so) and Alonso being unlucky in one and getting mixed up in an incident in another.

Quote:

mds ignore the drivel word i used to say about your post did not mean that:thumbup:

This discussion is ridiculous! No, "normal", person looks at an Olympic champion and says, oh, "she wasn't the fastest, she just had the fastest shoes", or, "the only reason he won the skeet competition is that he had the best shotgun". No, the person who's fastest, or has the most points, wins! We crown them Olympic champion and declare them the best in the world, PERIOD! Just because Nick Fry likes to stir things up, doesn't mean we all have to be sucked into his stupid discussion! I really thought Formula 1 fans were smarter than this.

This discussion is ridiculous! No, "normal", person looks at an Olympic champion and says, oh, "she wasn't the fastest, she just had the fastest shoes", or, "the only reason he won the skeet competition is that he had the best shotgun". No, the person who's fastest, or has the most points, wins! We crown them Olympic champion and declare them the best in the world, PERIOD! Just because Nick Fry likes to stir things up, doesn't mean we all have to be sucked into his stupid discussion! I really thought Formula 1 fans were smarter than this.

Would that still be the case if the rest of the field drove around in M3's compared to Vettels RB?

Just because Nick Fry likes to stir things up, doesn't mean we all have to be sucked into his stupid discussion!

But why not? Discussions about drivers are as old as F1 itself, and as long as people are mature and give credit where due, why not? It can be entertaining, and people can learn from each other. I know I have.

This discussion is ridiculous! No, "normal", person looks at an Olympic champion and says, oh, "she wasn't the fastest, she just had the fastest shoes", or, "the only reason he won the skeet competition is that he had the best shotgun". No, the person who's fastest, or has the most points, wins! We crown them Olympic champion and declare them the best in the world, PERIOD! Just because Nick Fry likes to stir things up, doesn't mean we all have to be sucked into his stupid discussion! I really thought Formula 1 fans were smarter than this.

Would that still be the case if the rest of the field drove around in M3's compared to Vettels RB?

This discussion is ridiculous! No, "normal", person looks at an Olympic champion and says, oh, "she wasn't the fastest, she just had the fastest shoes", or, "the only reason he won the skeet competition is that he had the best shotgun". No, the person who's fastest, or has the most points, wins! We crown them Olympic champion and declare them the best in the world, PERIOD! Just because Nick Fry likes to stir things up, doesn't mean we all have to be sucked into his stupid discussion! I really thought Formula 1 fans were smarter than this.

There are so many variables in play that determine where a driver finishes a race other than talent. If Vettel, Alonso or Hamilton had been driving an HRT last year they wouldn't have scored any points at all, but that wouldn't make any of them a terrible driver all of a sudden. driving F1 is not analagous to an Olympic sport, the equipment makes a FAR greater difference. And to be honest, I wouldn't have it any other way as it keeps things unpredictable and provokes interesting debate.

Can you imagine a similar debate applied to football? It would go something like this:

This discussion is ridiculous! No, "normal", person looks at an Olympic champion and says, oh, "she wasn't the fastest, she just had the fastest shoes", or, "the only reason he won the skeet competition is that he had the best shotgun". No, the person who's fastest, or has the most points, wins! We crown them Olympic champion and declare them the best in the world, PERIOD! Just because Nick Fry likes to stir things up, doesn't mean we all have to be sucked into his stupid discussion! I really thought Formula 1 fans were smarter than this.

There are so many variables in play that determine where a driver finishes a race other than talent. If Vettel, Alonso or Hamilton had been driving an HRT last year they wouldn't have scored any points at all, but that wouldn't make any of them a terrible driver all of a sudden. driving F1 is not analagous to an Olympic sport, the equipment makes a FAR greater difference. And to be honest, I wouldn't have it any other way as it keeps things unpredictable and provokes interesting debate.

Can you imagine a similar debate applied to football? It would go something like this:

"Lionel Messi is the best in the world""Yes, he is"

And that would be that. How dreadfully dull

F1 is no different than any Olympic equestrian sport. Nobody tries to take anything away from the gold medal riders just because they usually have the best horses and barn managers. Just like in F1, the best riders get the best horses...because if you try to be like the Saudi's and buy all the good teams' horses for a gazillion dollars you still can't compete well enough to win.

Dull?!...... Dull?! There was nothing dull about this season! It had everything! I've been watching Formula 1 for 40 years and I've never seen a more exciting season! I guess, if a season like that isn't enough to excite some people, meaningless chatter can fill the void. If that's the game, ok.

Hamilton has almost zero experience dealing with pressure..when its on him and fighting for WDC.,well bar his rokie year

2008 was very indicative of what Hamilton is like when he needs to deliver under pressure....he presses wrong buttons and gets trapped in sand boxes,please! ..and dont tell me its the team again!

So i say hold your horses before u compare him to Alonso or Vettel for that matter,but then again Nick Fry has been making dumb comments since i can remember

Oh please gimmie a break. If anything it's insulting to Lewis to compare him to Alonso. Even the Hamilton haters would admit that he is willing to go on the track and battle it out with his teammates and settle it on the track rather than coming up with dirty tricks and politics to keep his teammate down and/or ensure that a challenging driver never becomes his teammate as Alonso has done. That alone gives Hamilton more respect in my eyes. Before you critisize Hamilton on "delivering under pressure", remember that he fairly and squarely beat your boy Alonso in his rookie year to a point that Alonso decided to take his ball and go home.

I am a Hamilton fan but I think I'd have to say the best 3 drivers are 1. Vettel2. Alonso3. Hamilton

Vettel is a 3 times world champion. I have to account for that. People give him no credit whatsoever and disrespecting him whenever possible, but yet he continues to deliver. If it was just the car then Mark Weber should be right next to him in the standings, but he's nowhere to be found. Give credit where credit is due, the guy is good and he's probably only going to get better.

What seperates Alonso, Hamilton and i would say Kimi is they can win when the car isn't the best. Vettel still has to prove that yet, Jenson 100% can't and also other drivers would struggle.

Again, Vettel has proven that. Sadly the fact that he ended up on a team who's lead engineer is unfairly given all the credit when the fact is Red bull wasn't fairy cakes until Vettel came on board. That's something that it seems Vettel will have to unfairly endure until he proves he's a winner post Newey. The fact is he has just as much to do with Red Bull's successes as does Newey.

To clarify on both Alonso, Raikkonen AND Hamilton, they both won their championships while driving a car that was among the best but the cars were not the very best. '05 & '06 Ferrari and Renault were closely matched and in 2007 & 2008 the McLaren and Ferrari were dead nuts to one another and the final standings show just how so which says in plain black and white the cars driven to the championship were indeed not the very best in the field. It came down to the drivers and in 2008 at least, I think Massa outperformed Hamilton by the slightest edge in securing the best possible position when it counted and Hamilton was lucky Toyota made such a huge mistake to gift him the position he otherwise would have struggled to take and snatch the championship from Massa's clutches… barely.

Still highly competitive and ultra close though which is the point of this post.

What mistake did toyota make? by keeping their drivers out they gained positions, eg. if glock had pitted he would have been behind lewis anyway after the pits.